As a hijack, I’ve wondered why the US keeps printing $1 bills even though they claim they want Americans to use the $1 coins. After having traveled in England, I love that £1 and £2 coins are around and no bill lower than £5
We’ve discussed this unto death.
The outcome is folks from the rest of the civilized countries of the world pointing out how silly the US way is, particularly as inflation continues to eat the value of our coins & small bills.
The 'Merkin’s replies are a mix of “Yes, we should change”, “No, I hate all coins; don’t fill my pockets with $10 of heavy metal”, and “Any change to the currency is a sign of the 666 takeover by the Commies. Burn Washington first. It’s the only patriotic thing to do!!!11!!”
It appears our Congress is most afraid of the last group, so nothing is ever done. To them it looks like courting massive controversy for a negligible gain in operating costs at the money/coin factories. Easier to just ignore the issue.
Late add: Here’s the most recent train wreck on topic: So much for more dollar coins. - Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share - Straight Dope Message Board from about a month ago.
I don’t know what planet or plane you are living on.
Inflation isn’t rising because the government is printing more physical currency. There is currently about $860 billion in bills and coins out there (mostly held outside the US). The total money supply is between $6 trillion and $10 trillion, depending on how how define “money”.
Because Sacagawea dollars suck.
Seriously, am I supposed to replace my wallet with a burlap bag marked with a “$”?
I’ve heard that the U.S. has a 25 cent coin. Do you end up walking around with a burlap bag full of those coins? If not, then why would the same behaviour pattern not apply to 100 cent coins?
Here we go…
What most men in the US do is have a small container for change somewhere in there house. When they get home they put the accumulated change in this container and leave it until it starts to over flow then they take this to the bank or a coinstar machine and convert the silly lumps of metal back to money. Women with purses might actually spend the change. So if we had dollar coins men might start carrying change as it would be worth something.
I agree. Please let’s not turn this thread into a discussion of dollar coins.
Thirded. Focus people, focus.
My question was not about whether dollar coins were better than bills. The government prefers Americans to use the coins and yet they still print bills which the people prefer to use. So the question is why would the government still print $1 bills if they don’t want them used?
And yet, again, while I am not the OP, that does not appear to be the subject of this thread. If you want to discuss dollar coins versus dollar bills, please open a new thread.
Yes. It’s good for beating smart-asses upside the head.
Or women.
As I’m sure you know, nothing has “intrinsic” value in and of itself. Cash is valuable to buy food, but when starving on an island food has the value; obviously the first is the market economy we’re talking about.
In the absence of a backing institution like a government or bank (hello CEO Commander-in-Chief!), you’re suggestion here is correct with the Earth itself being the guarantor.
I would not go for gold. It is a drug on the market, will continue to be, and will fall to inflationary pressures in no time.
In gemstones, the same is true for diamonds. Sapphires and emeralds are the way to go.
As an example, European Jews, whose legal residency and livelihood were more than iffy, to say the least, for centuries, portability of value was of the essence. Hence the enormous number of Jews in jewelry
Just to wrap up - Canada has $1 and $2 coins (dumped the bills in the 90’s). Britain and Euroland have their similar coins. The world did not end; people do not drown every time they get near deep water.
Yes, a replacement “currency” will be found. Gold is typical because it has always been portable, recognizable, and easily saleable almost everywhere. Cigarettes, for example, only work in a place where the supply is limited and many people desire them. (Is the value of this currency becoming rarer as fewer people, even prsoners, smoke?) Things like Rolex or drugs are susceptible to fakery or dilution. You don’t know if they are real, and that would subtract from the value and acceptibility.
As I said earlier, the othe problem is “making change”. You can’t barter a cow for a gallon of milk, and you can’t use 2000 gallons of milk in one go, and the hassle accepting and redistributing subtracts from value.
OTOH, I recall a lecture by one of the first geologists to visit Russia after the Soviet union fell, when inflation was approaching meltdown proportions. He said people in Moscow were paid every day, and at lunchtime rushed out to buy something, anything they could find, while the money was still worth anything. Then in the evening, around the suburban subway stations while people were going home, everyone would be standing around holding up what they’d bought (a bag full of T-shirts, some books, etc.) to trade. When there was no reliable money, any physical saleable goods were what people went for.
Of course, in our hypothetical electronic-only OP world, the cash-only people would be trading with people who had legit electronic cash. I suspect gift cards (e.g. Walmart $100 gift card?) would become the currency; but only formpeople you trust or can retaliate against if they shaft you…